Huntington, Janowitz, or None of the Above? Conceptions of Professional Norms by Future Army Officers

02 October 2020, Version 3
This content is an early or alternative research output and has not been peer-reviewed at the time of posting.


Through a survey of 1,470 cadets at the U.S. Military Academy, we measure the strength of civil-military norms in the midst of their socialization to civil-military values. In addition, we use an embedded list experiment to measure true preferences to controversial questions in civil-military affairs, such as competing loyalties to democratic governance. To analyze cadet adherence to norms we first articulate a framework of various conceptions of professionalism. While cadets do not exhibit adherence to one particular framework, we find limited adherence to a purist Huntington model, and more of a conflicted reading of Huntington, as well as selectivity and superficiality in their commitment to norms, largely driven by their own partisan preferences. Lastly, we find concerning evidence that a significant number of cadets prioritize following orders over upholding democratic traditions, justifying Janowitz’s concerns that a military separate from society could breed attitudes among military personnel antithetical to democracy.


civil-military relations


Comments are not moderated before they are posted, but they can be removed by the site moderators if they are found to be in contravention of our Commenting Policy [opens in a new tab] - please read this policy before you post. Comments should be used for scholarly discussion of the content in question. You can find more information about how to use the commenting feature here [opens in a new tab] .
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy [opens in a new tab] and Terms of Service [opens in a new tab] apply.